From the Newsstands: This story appeared in The Eagle's December 2024 print edition. You can find the digital version here.
The Eagle’s editorial board is comprised of its staff but does not represent every individual staffer’s views. Rather, it provides an insight into how The Eagle, as an editorially-independent institution, responds to issues on campus.
American University is facing a $68 million deficit for the 2025 fiscal year, a $35.2 million increase since the University’s public deficit announcement in February 2024. AU’s administration cites low student enrollment and poor student retention as the root of the deficit, yet moves toward solutions that may drive more students away from the University.
The $68 million deficit was heavily influenced by shortcomings in AU’s student-generated revenue. Ninety-two percent of the University’s operating revenue is sourced from students through tuition, housing and dining. However, there has been little to no communication with students about the budget deficit or its solutions. As a university dependent on its existing students, AU bears a significant responsibility to current student generations. Administration’s lack of communication with students is not only exclusionary, but counterproductive, as it shatters trust in administration and discourages the enrollment and retention that the University relies on.
AU’s administration has independently drafted mass changes to academic programs, including restructuring the School of Education. The lack of communication surrounding these changes leaves students and faculty under the impression that their programs are being cut for the administration’s overestimation of revenue. The immediate shift to restructure programs, without including non-administrative voices, is reflective of a lack of care for the futures of current students, faculty and alumni.
Meanwhile, the University is pursuing an “R1: Doctoral Universities: Very High Research Activity” status. One of the requirements of this classification is spending $50 million on research and development. While an R1 status would award the University more credibility and perhaps higher enrollment, AU is first and foremost a liberal arts institution. Shifting the budget to research and restructuring existing programs unnecessarily undermines the University’s history and humanitarian specialties.
The University continues to discourage student retention with potential changes to housing and financial aid. The administration may require second-year students to live on campus, with the possibility of fines for those who live off campus. The second-year housing requirement reduces students’ financial autonomy on a campus that is unlikely to have adequate amounts of housing. While financial aid may be restructured to support students who cannot afford to live on campus for a second year, the premise of the plan is exploitative and controversial at best.
AU’s administration has displayed a pattern of isolating itself from students and faculty; however, current students and faculty must continue to demand direct investment from the University. Enrollment and retention are unlikely to rise as a result of the administration’s proposed restructuring, due to the perceived targeting of student finances and programs for an adverse goal of a drastically different reputation. Instead of prioritizing future generations of students who may admire this new reputation, administration must invest in current student and faculty needs, otherwise risking further drops in the University’s dwindling enrollment and retention.
This piece was written by Rebeca Samano Arellano and edited by Abigail Turner. Copy editing done by Luna Jinks, Emma Brown, Sabine Kanter-Huchting, Nicole Kariuki, Charlie Mennuti and Ella Rousseau. Fact checking done by Hannah Paisley Zoulek and Sasha Dafkova.
